tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post8618366624079989288..comments2024-03-29T03:19:09.227-04:00Comments on The Philosopher's Stone: A REPLY TO CHRISRobert Paul Wolffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-19948391004019471512014-03-06T12:36:14.665-05:002014-03-06T12:36:14.665-05:00@ Chris,
Thanks for that!@ Chris,<br /><br />Thanks for that!Magpiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07528637318288802178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-57850026930343706282014-03-06T09:17:13.801-05:002014-03-06T09:17:13.801-05:00Awful typo. I meant is 'NOT' the pinnacle ...Awful typo. I meant is 'NOT' the pinnacle of consumer health.<br /><br />As I understand Marx, the Keynesian impetus to increase wages would actually hurt the amount of value that could be produced and would thus lead to a fall in the rate of profit (presuming many other variables are held equal).<br /><br />Here's a short blog article on why these two people are not compatible. <br /><br />http://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/marx-versus-keynes-in-the-summer/Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08250295324149056708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-80692513843854986272014-03-06T04:52:45.804-05:002014-03-06T04:52:45.804-05:00A question for Chris (I am not taking sides in you...A question for Chris (I am not taking sides in your discussion, btw, I am just trying to understand your position.). <br /><br />Chris, you state:<br /><br />"... I cannot fathom how one can appreciate a Keynesian blog, when one is a Marxist in economics. Marx shows in Vol II and III that consumer consumption is the pinnacle of economic health."<br /><br />I am little confused by the paragraph above. Keynes emphasized consumer demand as determinant of business cycle fluctuations (as Krugman does, btw). If "consumer consumption is the pinnacle of economic health" in Marx's Capital, as you said, then wouldn't that meant that both thoughts are close (at least on this subject)?<br /><br />Then, wouldn't that mean that Keynesianism is not necessarily incompatible with Marxism?<br /><br />Magpiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07528637318288802178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-46501153254100580402014-03-05T17:29:10.584-05:002014-03-05T17:29:10.584-05:00It's quite simple. Yes I agree with Krugman on...It's quite simple. Yes I agree with Krugman on his conclusions (regarding progressive reform), I just disagree with the premises that lead to those conclusions, and consider them to be demonstrably false. So we will join forces until those premises are in conflict. But, I also think that so long as we operate under false premises, we will have 'unforeseen' outcomes, that are only foreseeable with the right theoretical premises (e.g., yes let's raise wages, but let's expect the rate of profit to fall, don't expect a healthy economy).<br /><br />I really think I'm being either pigeonholed or made into a strawman...<br />:(Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08250295324149056708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-11948503125297828322014-03-05T12:16:06.012-05:002014-03-05T12:16:06.012-05:00This was my point. If we do not want to join forc...This was my point. If we do not want to join forces with the Paul Krugmans of this world, what earthly hope do we have of putting a coalition together that can move the country to the left? Unless you are planning violent revolution or are waiting for the heavens to fall, you are going to have to work with people whose political orientation is to the right of Krugman, let alone with Krugman. Robert Paul Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-26108222887453466832014-03-05T08:54:39.771-05:002014-03-05T08:54:39.771-05:00By the way, to the best of my memory when Krugman ...By the way, to the best of my memory when Krugman was asked if he would be on board with socialism, he said that his socialist supporters would be upset to learn how conservative he really is.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08250295324149056708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-70462207821660978312014-03-04T19:16:25.136-05:002014-03-04T19:16:25.136-05:00I e-mailed Wolff a response to this post. I leave ...I e-mailed Wolff a response to this post. I leave it to his discretion to respond, or not. Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08250295324149056708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-29367985828677152362014-03-04T17:24:36.858-05:002014-03-04T17:24:36.858-05:00Dear Professor Wolff.
First let me thank you for...Dear Professor Wolff. <br /><br />First let me thank you for the blog and everything else. You've been a light and an inspiration. <br /><br />Now, perhaps the gap between you two can be narrowed, since it has been suggested (half-seriously) that Krugman may slowly be moving towards Marx. Hence the apparition of the hashtag #RedKugmanRising on Twitter. Apparently, Krugman's references to Michal Kalecki are one clue. Another would be his move from Princeton to CUNY... And Krugman has said before that he has radicalized since his younger days. So he may be getting there... Charles-Maxime Panacciohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08642112496936994638noreply@blogger.com